Saturday sip and self care

 I hope everyone is having a wonderful weekend already, and if not here's hoping it changes for you. For those who have beenfollowing the Sonya Massey case it has been a heavy week, especially for everyone in the courtroom who have viewed such intense photos and videos. 

That being said I figured today I'd post about some self care. I tell yall I woke up feelinga s if I got rain over by a bus, though I'm fairly certain there is a possibility my black cat may be partially to blame, but the toll of the week definitely is catching up. 

I mentioned in other posts that I am a patient with mental illness. This is something that I've had since my teens, and a part of my life. Self care for everyone is paramount in maintaining your well-being, and even more so when your own brain is fighting to tear you down, or the most random things transport you back to the worst moments of your life. 

My self care routine varies depending on my mood, needs, and what is available. Today I took my little pack of "Affirmations for a Bad Ass" cards with me to take a nice hot bath wiht Vanilla epson salts and listened to some good music. 

What does your self care look like?

I'm grabbing a bottle of Electra red moscato for some relaxation with a good book later too. If you like a nice sweet mellow wine, I highly highly recommend it. I have to keep my wine intake low because with my bariatric surgery the sugar content can cause dumping syndrome. So, when I drink wine I make the most of the little bit I drink.

Key players in the Sonya Massey case and trial

 First and foremost Ms. Sonya Massey Never forget her name 

Prosecution is States Atty John Milhiser  

And assistant Mary Beth Rodgers

Judge Ryan Cadagin

Defense is Dan Fultz and Mark Wycoff

Fultz 

Wykoff

Grayson

(2024 photo)

2025

Sonya Massey

I debated on whether or not to include a photo of Deputy Farley just in case he does undercover work. I googled his name just to see what comes up, and used something from the Sheriff’s department’s X account since they have it up I’d assume it’s a pretty safe one to use. I realized when I saw this photo that I have actually met Farley in the past, now I’m not saying I know him or anything, but all day the 22nd I was sitting there like, “man I wish I could put my finger on where I recognize him from” I wasn’t looking directly at him as much either, because I was writing in my lil notes lol. Anyways he is one of the folks who has been out for my nice neighbor lady’s problematic adult children. There’s actually a funny story that includes Farley. 

A few months ago a guy was out there yelling at, well basically yelling at the dang house across the street. They started fighting and fussing. It scared my 7 year old so I had to go be the crazy neighbor lady and call 911. I stay out of it usually, until either my kids or other kids seem to be scared or affected or someone might mess my property up. I will throw a whole entire fit if they break our outside toys. 

Anyways Dude is outside fussing and carrying on, and the cops show up and boom he runs. The cops catch up pretty easily, but then as he is cuffed he starts yelling  “I’m having the asthma.” Oh yeah, just like that. Well, one of the officers goes up to the car he was standing behind and he’s chuckling. We joked back and forth and he’s like “I don’t think he knows how asthma works”. 

He brought a chill vibe to the whole thing and handled everything really darn well. It’s good knowing he’s still out here doing good in our community. 

Grayson Trial October 24th (Sonya Massey case)

 Yall, I’m dragging a little bit today. My very rude cat, Binx walked on my keyboard last night so I sat down today and this bratty little cat turned on sticky keys and idk what else. She’s lucky she’s cute. 

Aaaanyways we are off to running start on the 5th day of trial, my 3rd day here and do not fear, I’ve got on actual tie up shoes double knotted nice and tight, so I won’t be chucking my Chucks. 

The first witness is called to the stand at about 9:05 am. This is Seth Stoughton a professor at the University of South Carolina School of Law (I’m a law nerd so this makes me giddy)

Seth is the faculty director of the Excellence in Policing and Public Safety Program at the University of South Carolina and a Law Professor teaching criminal law, criminal procedure and police law and policy. 

Okay, Stoughton is super impressive! He has written a book titled “Evaluating Police Uses of Force”. This book is about how society evaluates the use-of-force incidents by examining four perspectives. These are constructional law, state law, administrative regulation and community expectations. 

Stoughton has also testified as an expert about 150 times. Milhiser asks Judge Cadagin to accept him as an expert in the area of generally accepted police practices and the use of force. The defense has follow up questions (like seriously though why, this guy is def an expert) 

At 9:17 ish Wykoff asks if Stoughton has testified as an expert in a criminal trial in the past. Stoughton answers in the affirmative. He is accepted as an expert, so Milhiser begins questioning. 

Stoughton that policing is a highly diffused profession and highly localized. He deciphers what a well trained officer thinks in a situation based on what officers actually do, so when reviewing a case, Stoughton aims to understand all of the facts. He then conducts a comprehensive review of materials. Fultz calls a sidebar and jury exits. 

9:33 am Fultz and Wykoff object because they believe there could be confusion because Stoughton and Grayson may have different understandings of “best practices”. 

The discussion continues and Milhiser points out that at focus here is “generally accepted police practices” I mean, hello, common sense is common sense, and right is right. I don’t understand the confusion, but that’s just me. 

Judge Cadagin accepts the fact that from pre-trial motions that witnesses are not to offer legal conclusions to the jury; however, the issue at hand is a fair generalization. In other words, generally accepted practices as opposed to legal conclusions. Fultz is pushing hard. He states that Stoughton’s testimony will be based on national standards as opposed to Sangamon County policy. 

Fultz and Wykoff are concerned that the national standards are higher than Sangamon county and that this would confuse the jury. Bro, they aren’t dumb. 

Milhiser is piiiiissed! “It’s hard to believe we are doing this now when the defense counsel made an untimely motion” He is shaking the 40 page report in the air. Grayson is fidgeting and you can tell he’s antsy. Seriously though, these guys had access to the witnesses’ backgrounds before now. They had plenty of time to make these motions and mention these things before today. 

This is likely why he overrules the objection. Wykoff wants a similar allowance as yesterday with Dekmar, asking to cross-examine the witness “within the barometer of what the state is now seeking from the court”

At 10:17 the judge and jury are back in the room. Milhiser returns to his questioning and Stoughton explains the difference between risk and threat. It’s professionally appropriate to use force when there is a threat, but not when there is a risk. 

Three parts of a threat 

1. Ability - a subject has the physical capacity to cause harm, such as having a weapon

2. Opportunity - a subject has the opportunity to cause harm (they are close enough or within range considering the weapon)

3. Intention - based on actions, for example if they look as though they are about to cause harm. Think, they have something heavy in hand and are raring back to throw it. 

A risk is any one or two components of a threat. So basically a threat is all three and a risk is one or two 

Approaching 10:30 and Stoughton states that Grayson made decisions that were not tactically sound. (pulling his gun and standing in front of Deputy Farley) 

Stoughton states that at the moment Grayson draws his firearm massey has the ability (holding a pot of hot water) I’m still calling bull shit that there was any hot water still in the pot. Remember the body-cam? So, you hear the water running. If you watch Sonya Massey, she goes to the sink, and well what do we do with a pot of hot water at the sink with water running? Just sayin.  She did not have the opportunity, though because she was too far away to harm Grayson (duuuuh). Her behavior also does not suggest any intent to harm him. So, there is a risk but no threat. 

Now, when Grayson approached Massey after she apologized (because of course everyone apologizes and ducks when they are about to attack. Literally my eyes are rolling more than a cue ball on league night. I also have Limp Bizkit Rollin stuck in my head because apparently that’s a theme right now) and with the “Massey’s motion of throwing the pot” I wanna knock dude out, because he definitely did not watch the same thing I did. Anywhozit this supposed motion creates an imminent threat. This moment is referred to as the final frame. If I can figure out a way to link my tiktok in which I slowed down the ISP video literally frame by frame to google docs I will, because I just honestly don’t see it. 

https://www.tiktok.com/@jessa_belle_writes/video/7395770160671509791?_r=1&_t=ZT-90p7HUdQzZf

Stoughton does say that the “Final Frame” approach does not take the totality of everything that led up to that moment into account. He emphasized the importance of looking at everything leading up to the final frame. 

Stoughton synchronized both footages from Grayson and Farley using the audio. Doing this gives both points of view as opposed to just the one. 

Milhiser presents a CD that Stoughton made with a full-length version and took a snippet of the point where Grayson shot Sonya. This is now being played for the jury and courtroom. 

This time Grayson actually does watch the video, he has also been taking notes during this particular testimony. 

At about 11 Stoughton commends Farley for doing a good job of creating distance between himself and Sonya Massey as she went into the kitchen. If Sonya had wanted to, she had the ability to harm them, but Farley took away opportunity by moving away. He says that Sonya showed no intent to harm though. 

Stoughton moving closer to Sonya after he drew his firearm increases the opportunity for her to cause harm. Ohhhh, Grayson can’t look at the woman he killed, of course he can’t he’s a, let’s call him a pansy and try to watch my potty mouth. He looks away when the camera cuts to Farley rendering aid. 

We are going through the video literally frame by frame now. Stoughton states that both officers could have walked out of the house when Sonya grabbed the pot. There was really no tactical need to be inside the home. 

Now Milhiser asks if the shooting was acceptable, proper, or appropriate in regards to tactics and Stoughton answers with a very stern “no”. With that Milhiser has no further questions and defense calls a sidebar. Wykoff is being whiny about having enough time to cross-examine. That’s not an issue because we are going to lunch my guy and he can cross after that. 

Back to the grind at 1:05 (I had Taco Bell today, because a cantina chicken taco sounded good) Wykoff is still salty, and I’m tempted to wear my morton’s shirt under a blazer one of these days. 

He asks Stoughton for more details about his experience as an officer (we’ve already admitted him as an expert but okay) Ohhhh, yuck I see what he’s doing. He goes over to his lil buddy Sean and pats his back noting that they were officers for a similar number of years, calling them “similarly situated”.  

This literally gives me all the ick, yall. On the stand we have a man who obviously respects the badge, law enforcement, and the people that officers serve in their communities. Sitting across from him in the defense seat is a “man” who rotated through all of the small town police departments, did not respect the community enough to move to city limits, and couldn’t even bother with protocol. 

Stoughton seems to have the ick as well, because I see a mouth shrug and his nose crinkles a little bit with a fairly classic disgust micro-expression. (Thank you the behavior panel and Professor Briley at Lincoln Land for those lil lessons) he also states, “The source of my expertise is as a police researcher for the past 13 years.” YESSSIIIIRRR

So, basically Wykoff is debating The Force Science Institute’s 24 articles most of which were published, but Stoughton states that the journal in which they’re published is a “nonscientific journal”.

1:44 The defense asks Stoughton if he has a good handle on generally accepted practices and how they tie into the use of deadly force. Obviously, he answers with a yes. 

Ten till two p.m and Wykoff is reading the Sangamon County Deadly Force Application Policy. It states in the policy, “When reasonable, the deputy shall, prior to the use of deadly force, make efforts to identify as a police officer and to warn that deadly force may be used.” I don’t think telling a frail woman who only said “I rebuke you in the name of Jesus” “You better fucking not. I’ll shoot you right in the fucking head” but I’m no expert. 

So, now Wykoff is bringing up the margin of error in the Deadly Force Application guidelines and it’s a good thing I only had the one taco, because this argument is so contrived I want to yak. Wykoff brings up a bull crap example of someone taking a pen out of their pocket, and an officer shooting them because they believed the pen to be a switchblade. This humongous reach in Wykoff’s opinion falls within the margin of error. Stoughton replies that the question is whether the mistake is reasonable. 

Mr. Wykoff, asking a person to remove a pot from a stove, then being all shocked that said woman has that pot in her hands is not reasonable. What did he expect poor Sonya Massey to do? Was she supposed to use some psychokinesis? 

Stoughton notes that perfection is not expected, but that an officer acting professionally and appropriately is expected. 

2:03 and upon further questioning Stoughton cannot confirm whether the training Grayson received is in accordance with generally accepted practices. 

Stoughton asserts that his role today is that of an academic perspective from which he looks at generally accepted practices. With his education and background he identifies best practices and seeks to make them generally accepted. 

They both agree that there is a difference between generally accepted practices and best practices. 

Stoughton takes a number of factors into account when reviewing use of force. They try to adopt an officer’s mindset as opposed to 20/20 hindsight. Stoughton and his peers focus on the nature of the mistake and if it was a reasonable one also factoring in the officer’s perspective on the scene. 

Wykoff seeks clarification from Stoughton on Sangamon Co’s Deadly Force policy. Basically he is trying to point out that the Sangamon County policy does not mention “ability”, “opportunity”, and “intent”. Stoughton contends that the policy references the same concepts, though the wording is different. 

I’m thoroughly frustrated and really had to fight to keep my sighs from being loud and annoying. Apparently ISP and Stoughton agree that in the frame by frame breakdown they saw Massey starting to throw the pot of water. I’m telling yall she had a freaking pot holder in her hand. 

We are going to break now thank goodness so I can rage internally in the bathroom. 

I may have cursed the entire world out under my breath and made someone in the bathroom clutch her pearls, but I’m less heated… well, kinda. 

Yall, hold your butts! Wykoff has brought up how Sonya Massey said, “I rebuke you in the name of Jesus” This dude better take up pilates or yoga with all this stretching he is up to, wait hold that thought. Let’s hope he doesn’t because I want him to feel the stretchy burn. You’ll see what I mean, because he asks Wykoff “In religion, water oftentimes has a meaning, right?” 

Stoughton asserts that he is not a religious expert or well versed in it. Fine, fine Stoughton comes off of my anger list a little bit. 

Wykoff must think he has won something here. Stoughton’s report indicated that Ms. Massey could have posed an imminent threat of great bodily harm when Sonya had the pot of water and crouched, and when Grayson advanced with his firearm drawn. 

Wykoff (I really just wanna call him something else that rhymes with his name, but starts with Jack, but I’ll hold back) takes out Stoughton’s book which references tactical missteps. He’s pointing out the line in the book stating “Time is the single most important tactical principle in training.” 

Wouldn’t need to worry about time if you hadn’t Oh I dunno flipped your shit over a simple saying. 

Moving on, though, and Wykoff asks Stoughton which sources he used to inform his conclusions about Grayson’s tactically unsound decisions. Stoughton ever so classily replies citing his book “Evaluating Police Uses of Force” as well as a list of other academic sources. That was satisfying. 

Wykoff tries to be a petty Betty by asking Stoughton if his being here is a stop on his book tour to advance best practices. Stoughton - “I never had a book tour, that would be nice. The book is not about best practices. The book is about generally accepted practices.” With that shut down the defense has no further questions and my dark lil heart does a flip. 

I’m not surprised that Milhiser redirects at 3:27 ish and references the defense’s question about how Grayson and Stoughton were both officers for similar amounts of time. He points out how Grayson was involved in an officer involved shooting while Stoughton never was. (cackling!!!) 

Long story, short Stoughton points out there are different experiences and outcomes when an officer follows his training vs one who does not. Well played my guys, well played. 

With that we are done. I need wine, or something as well as to scream and yell at stuff. 

Grayson trial Oct 23: autopsy and expert witnesses (Sonya Massey case)

 Parts of today are being relayed to me by a new press friend I made, because I have a sick little one who needs to see the doctor today. After lunch I should be back in the courtroom in person. 

I did not miss too much thankfully and I want to thank everyone from Reporting Live from My Sofa Podcast for being super supportive and positive while I jump in during breaks. 

So, here we go with the 2nd day of testimony, yesterday was heavy, and it likely will be today as well. The evidence box is sitting out and I believe we will be hearing from the medical examiner.

Taking the stand first at about 9:02 pm is Illinois State Police Trooper Adam Markwell. He is being questioned by Beth Rodgers (assistant state’s atty) 

Markwell starts by explaining what crime scene processing is. He processed the scene and collected evidence from Dawson Farley and Sean Grayson on the day of the shooting. 

Rodgers presents photos of that were taken including photos of Grayson. 

Markwell exits the stand and looks at the evidence cart. He reads the continents of a bag. In that bag is Grayson’s uniform, he also confirms that Grayyson’s firearm is on the evidence cart then returns to the stand. 

Photos are being shown of the crime scene and we also see the pot resting on the kitchen floor. 

In one photo two bullet casings are seen, and Markwell identifies the casings he was handed just now as the ones from the scene. 

At about 9:15 Malachi Hill-Massey arrives. Malachi Graduated from South East High School just back in June bless him. She never got to see her baby graduate and that just guts me.  I’m gonna drop a link to a news report that has an interview with him, because it just shows what a wonderful young man Massey had a hand in raising. 

https://newschannel20.com/news/local/malachi-massey-speaks-out-on-graduating-from-southeast-high-after-the-death-of-his-mom

Markwell again approaches the evidence cart and identifies the medical bag from the card board box as the one at the scene. Upon returning to the stand he is handed the third casing which was found 2 days after the shooting when officers returned to the crime scene.

Markwell was present at Sonya Massey’s autopsy and Rodgers hands questioning off to Mark Wykoff

At about 9:23 Wykoff questions Markwell about other evidence found at the scene and Markwell notes that an ammo box containing 41 bullets was found as well, and now a short break, and no further questions. 

Jury re-enters at 9:36 and we now have the sixth witness. ISP Trooper Emily Maulding. Maulding worked as a crime scene investigator and Rodgers is again handling the questioning. 

Maulding assisted Markwell in evidence collection. Markwell had secured Sonya’s clothes and handed them off to Maulding for processing.  A photo of Sonya’s robe is shown. I just want to note that Sonya imo looked so flipping adorable in her robe and night clothes. It makes this all even worse. She wasn’t hurting a dang soul. 

Approaching 9:43 ish am and Maulding now stepped down and comes to the evidence cart. She identifies the pot she collected from the scene and puts on gloves to hold it up for the jury. 

Defence decines cross 

Now we have witness number 7 Hali Carls-Miller from ISP Crime Lab. Milhiser is questioning and requests that she be declared a firearm and toolmark identification expert to which the defense and Judge Cadigan agree

Ms. Carls-Miller detailed how she processed Grayson’s weapon and the bullets confirming that she determined the three fired cartridges retrieved from the scene did in fact originate from Grayson’s weapon. Upon gloving up (everyone handling evidence has done this btw) she holds the weapon up for the jury. 

10:00 am and Wykoff actually wants to cross examine this witness. 

He states that Carls-Miller can’t guarantee that the bullet casings were fired from the same firearm. Seriously, dude I think she can. 

Yes, she can. She states “It is my opinion they were based on my training and experience”  This questioning seems silly because it has never been contested that Grayson fired the weapon, but hey I’m not getting paid the big bucks as an attorney, so what do I know. 

10:03 and Wykoff asks a very dumb question. He asks Carls-Miller about Grayson’s mindset while firing the gun. No shocker that the State objects because Carls-Miller is an expert on firearms, not mindset. Cadigan agrees and asks Wykoff to reword 

It’s a flop, yall because he has no further questions and we have another break. 

So, for those who do not know Sean Grayson does have cancer, He was diagnosed with stage 3 colon cancer in 2024 and has been undergoing Chemotherapy. His defense tried to use this to get him pretrial release but he was shut down. This was a contentious issue as it was ruled he was denied pretrial release (Aug 2024) , then upon an appeal it was allowed (Nov 2024). However in December it was taken to the Supreme court and his release was paused. 

May of 2025 defense again asked the IL Supreme court to release him citing the diagnosis. 

It was yet again denied in July, but he was moved form Macon County Jail (in Decatur Il land of stinky soy air iykyk) to Sangamon County jail in Springfield to accommodate his procedures and treatment. Springfield has some of the best cancer centers here and 2 different hospitals as well as SIU training. If he had to be anywhere for treatment this is where he’d wanna be) 

So, you may see notes from others about Grayson looking Gaunt and he definitely is thinner than he was in July, but he is undergoing Chemo, and I mean I’m sure the food isn’t 5 star so there’s that too. 

He’s just standing around during break chatting with members of his defense team, and again I’m so glad I wore boots today,  because if I wore heels that easily slip off I’d be walking home minus a shoe that has been lobbed at the back of his head. 

Everyone is back and settling by 10:20 and we are about to look at autopsy photos. Milhiser gives a warning that they are graphic, but necessary. Good lord can her family catch a break. Just yesterday was the footage, but he’s right it is necessary. Both parties are at the bench going through what will be shown to the jury. 

Grayson is watching he’s got a similar posture as yesterday, he knows this is going to look bad I think. We have a lot of shifting in his seat as both sides are deliberating the relevance of particular photos. It appears that one photo in particular is pretty contentious. Wykoff does not seem to want this one included, but Milhiser is fighting for it. 

Once that is settled, the judge gives the jury and gallery a warning that the next witness will have photos that are hard to look at. 

Dr. Nathaniel Patterson, a forensic pathologist with Sangamon County Coroner’s office, is called to the stand at 10:27. Dr. Patterson conducted Sonya Massey’s autopsy, and he is recognized by the court as an expert. 

Milhiser presents the photos of the autopsy and someone behind us, with Sonya’s family has to leave the room when we get to a photo of her brain. 

10:40 and here are the meat and potatoes. Dr. Patterson explains that a gunshot wound entered under Massey’s left eye and exited from the left side of her neck. Her right leg had minor bruising. The brain had minor hemorrhaging on the underside of the left side of the brain, and a hairline fracture on the skull. So it appears the trajectory was down and left

Dr. Patterson states the bullet did not go through her brain. The left internal carotid artery had been cut in half. 

An X-ray  of her head reveals bullet fragments in the left side of her face. “She died of a gunshot wound of the head.” “She bled to death through that transected carotid artery.” 

FUCKING HUGE AND I’D ALL BUT GUARANTEE THIS RIGHT HERE IS WHAT GOT GRAYSON UP TO FIRST DEGREE BECAUSE IT WILL SHOW PREMEDIATION OR LACK OF CARE FOR HER WELLBEING AS SHE BLED OUT. PREMEDITATION LAW NERD MOMENT INCOMING 

In Illinois premeditation is not defined by a length of time for planning an act, but if the defendant had the opportunity to reflect on their actions before committing the killing. So, that moment when Grayson told Farley not to get the med bag is where premeditation was born. 

Another factor in determining premeditation is a lack of provocation from the victim, a lethal attack after the victim was already helpless, or behavior before and after the crime. Now typically this would be fleeing or destroying evidence, but IMO in this case where our lil buddy kept saying “she was going to throw boiling water at me” and called her a “crazy bitch” fit that last point as well as the obvious other factors fitting the first two 

Also in IL first degree murder is  “a person commits first degree-murder if, without lawful justification, they kill an individual or do one of the following: 

• Intend to kill or cause great bodily harm to that person or another

• Know that their acts will cause death to that person or another

• Know that their acts create a “strong probability” of death or great bodily harm

• Kill a person while committing or attempting to commit a forcible felony 

Grayson is being accused of the first 3 offenses which is where we get the 3 first degree murder charges 

And now back to your regularly scheduled trial notes

Dr. Patterson states that the wound could have been survivable if medical treatment had been provided soon and bleeding had been controlled.  Slam the rhinestone gavel Grayson is cooked imo. 

Dr. Patterson informs the room, “If you lose your left carotid artery, and you still have your right, there’s a chance blood could still circulate if you tie off the left one.”  

After this at about 10:53 Wykoff takes to cross examining Dr. Patterson. Wykoff states that medical literature shows that some people live and some die after having a cut internal carotid artery and receiving medical treatment to which Patterson agrees. I think we all know it is definitely not a guarantee, but a possibility, one that Grayson robbed Sonya Massey of. 

We have a sidebar at 10:55  and jury leaves the room at 10:55 Milhiser objects to a question that Wykoff asked (I totally missed what that was because I had a sneeze attack) 

Okay, it appears it was about substances in Sonya’s system. Milhiser withdraws the objection and the jury returns

11:10 Wykoff mentions that Sonya Massey’s peripheral blood sample was positive for Delta 9 THC and Gabapentin. Dr. Patterson agrees that the Delta 9 THC can cause distorted perception. Gabapentin is a central nervous system depressant (I have taken gabapentin for fibromyalgia, it’s a fairly safe nonaddictive pain treatment for things like fibro and neuropathy) IL does allow recreational marijuana as well. 

Milhiser comes in with a redirect and asks “Would you agree the sooner medical treatment is provided, the higher the chance of survival?” and Patterson says yes. 

We are now going to lunch until 1 pm central time 

We are back in the courtroom after lunch with the Sofa Squad (iykyk) 

1:02 ish and the ninth witness is called. We are joined by retired St. Anthony Rigano, Elgin Police Department. He has been a Crisis intervention instructor since 2006 and Rodgers is questioning. 

Rigano teaches the “verbal de-escalation in tactical response” aspect of Crisis intervention with a 40 hour course. 

Grayson took a 40-hour CIT course from March 20 to 24th in 2023 

This course is for teaching less than lethal tactics while dealing with individuals with mental illness or developmental disabilities 

Honestly I’m amazed that something did not happen while Grayson was employed by Kincaid PD from Feb 2021 to May 2021 this jack off refused to move within 10 miles of the village which I mean duh. His time with Kincaid does overlap some with Pawnee 

Kincaid back story (my momma still lives there and I still visit a lot. I graduated from this town) In Kincaid there was a resident who only recently passed last year who has struggled with Schizophrenia as well as other mental illnesses and the police knew him well. For the most part the cops have been kind and helpful with him. Chief Mathon has gone above and beyond to help this man known fondly as Roy Boy get help, make sure he was in a safe place, and taking care of himself. So, it is a shock that nothing awful happened during Grayson’s tenure with Kincaid PD

They are now playing the slideshow that Rigano uses to teach “Verbal de-escalation and Tactical Response” 

Rigano describes how policing is made better with this particular model and I could not agree more. 

Conflict resolution notes from slide show - Recognizing, defusing, controlling aggressive behavior through the use of crisis intervention techniques, therapeutic communication, and understanding attitudes emotions and behavior

Rigano teaches maturity in crisis intervention. I think Grayson forgot this part Mature officers can handle it when their authority is challenged. They bring confident energy to calls. Grayson is watching and listening this time, and he is probably regretting every decision he has made. 

1:18 ish and Rigano mentions slowing down and letting time behind to defuse a situation. An officer may have be uncomfortable but it’ll ease anxiety … yall I think Grayson was there on opposite day. 

I seriously cannot with Grayson. This course that he took teaches to do THE EXACT OPPOSITE of everything Grayson did. Literally everything. 

Rigano continues on mentioning “Officer Created jeopardies” (hmm like taking a simple little saying and going absolutely batshit crazy?” 

In order to pass CIT officers do two role plays with actors, one is pretty standard and the other is not. HOW THE EFF DID HE PASS

And at 1:35 Wykoff takes to cross examination

Ohhhh okayyy it looks like Rigano is the one who taught Grayson’s class!! Wykoff says that service providers are also trained in some form of crisis intervention. He taught “verbal de-escalation and the Tactical Response” 

So, I think what Wykoff is doing here is trying to point out that Grayson was in a crisis state of thinking … damn there go my eyes rolling Rigano agrees that “crisis state” has a broader definition than some may think. Crisis state thinking is emotional rather than logical and normal coping strategies do not help to soothe. 

Rodgers now redirects and confirms that crisis state does not always pertain to mental illness and now a break. 

I’m on my laptop now and trying to live update on docs, so there may be more typos bear with me here

2:10 pm and Rodgers asks judge Cadigan to declare the tenth witness, retired LaGrange, Georgia Chief of Police Lou Dekmar as an expert. Dekmar has almost fifty years of law enforcement experience (he’s like an adorable grandpa I gotta include a photo) 

OMIGOSH yall our guy here has brought his CV and all for reference. He is like super duper professional and just on top of it. 

Wykoff states Dekmar is testifying as an expert in the use of force and police training. Rodgers asks to declare him as an expert on police policy and procedure. I don’t think Wykoff wants him up there or wants his testimony to be looked at as less experienced because he emphasizes that Dekmare has not been in the witness box before a jury. Dekmar primarily provides written statements or depositions. 

Wykoff asks Dekmar, “Is this the first time you are testifying as an expert in a criminal trial?” Dekmar responds in the affirmative. There’s some more at the sidebar and Judge Cadigan accepts Dekmar as an expert on police policy and procedure. 

Questioning commences at 2:38 Dekmar confirms that he has reviewed the body-worn camera policy and CIT policy for Sangamon county. He correlates the importance of policies and training for determining whether an officer’s actions were appropriate in a given situation. 

2:40 pm Dekmar reviewed Grayson’s report and the footage of both cameras. He determined that Sonya Massey was affected by mental illness. He states that “It should’ve been clear” 

Shock of shocks Dekmar states that Grayson did not apply what he learned at CIT training when dealing with Ms. Massey 

Let’s list the ways (ok he didn’t say that, he gave examples. This is clearer though) 

• Asking for Massey’s driver’s license instead of asking what Sonya was doing while she rifled through her papers

• Pressuring Massey to hang up with dispatch

• His voice was commanding and not facilitating 

• Did not even try to develop rapport 

He points out that when Grayson pointed the weapon and her and yelled at her that Massey shrinked back, “like you’d expect someone to do if they had a weapon pulled on them.”

2:56 sidebar they are debating the term use of force being used Rodgers points out that Dekmar is referring to the actual “use of force policy” Judge Cadigan says the defense can cross-examine about the use of this statement and we then have a short break

Back in at about 3:18 pm Dekmar points to the fact that Grayson “collapsed the distance between” between himself and Ms. Massey. This action is what created the perceived jeopardy and “you can’t take advantage of time”

Dekmar notes that he did not see any threatening behavior from Sonya Massey before Grayson pointed a gun at her. Pointing a gun at someone is “a use of force” and not in line with the Sangamon Co policy. 

Now Wykoff is up to cross 

It is confirmed that Dekmare reviewed over 2k use of force incidents throughout his career. 

Dekmar wrote a 19 page report about Sean Grayson noting he did not follow CIT. Wykoff points out the criticism of Grayson telling Sonya Massey to hurry when answering the door. 

3:45 Wykoff mentions that Grayson did not receive information that he was going to be dealing with a 10-96 (person with a mental illness) HAHAHA yesss Dekmar!! He states that CIT should be used for all interactions with all types of people. (go grandpa)

Wykoff asks where in the footage Grayson violated Sangamon Co modern high-risk traffic stop policy. 

Rodgers objects to Wykoff reading from a memorandum. We have sidebar, then a break after which the sidebar will clarify. Rodgers argues that parameters agreed upon earlier in the week note that this memorandum is irrelevant and unnecessary . This is a hotly contested one and after like eight minutes it is decided that this memorandum will not be used for questioning. 

Jury returns and Wykoff asks what Dekmar used to form his opinion that Grayson violated the use of force policy. 

DEEP CALMING BREATHS… DON’T THROW YOUR PHONE AT THE DEFENSE, JESS. BE GOOD AND BREATHE (Sorry guys but ohhh this line of questioning has me heated) 

Wykoff poses a hypothetical mentioning Grayson approaching the counter and Massey attempting to throw water from the pot thus creating a threat. 

Dekmar ain’t having it. He says that regardless of that potential scenario Grayson still violated his training. Wykoff is arguing semantics now, asks where in the policy it states that if you violate “one small black and white rule” that it violates the whole entire policy. WTAF isn’t that obvious

Rodgers objects and states that Wykoff is badgering the witness (oh he is) and Wykoff agrees to move on. And he wraps it up by asking if Dekmar believes that all life is sacred and Dekmar obviously replies with a “yes” 

I really do not know what he is trying to prove with some of this questioning. 

No further questions and Rodgers redirects asking Dekmar if Ms. Massey posed a threat to Grayson. Dekmar states that in his opinion he did not think so.